FBI

Don't Look for Good Guys in Trump's Battle With the FBI

Even if they unseat a president opposed by many Americans, the FBI and the intelligence community are not the heroes you're looking for.

|

You don't have to be a fan of the current president, or of the vindictive way in which he wields power, to recognize that he raises valid concerns about the FBI's investigation into his presidential campaign's involvement with Russian interference in the 2016 election. President Donald Trump may brandish the Department of Justice (DOJ) like a bludgeon, but he does so against an FBI and intelligence community that have powerful weapons of their own and a history of putting them to sketchy use.

"Justice Department officials have shifted an administrative review of the Russia investigation closely overseen by Attorney General William P. Barr to a criminal inquiry," The New York Times reports. "The move gives the prosecutor running it, John H. Durham, the power to subpoena for witness testimony and documents, to convene a grand jury and to file criminal charges."

Yes, this means that the Justice Department is criminally investigating its own role in another investigation.

This investigation of an investigation is widely portrayed as a blatant political move by the Trump administration to discredit the work behind the Mueller Report and to retaliate against officials who participated in its creation. Honestly, Trump's frantic search for allies foreign and domestic on the matter makes that portrayal pretty easy, though it doesn't cover the full picture. In this scenario, the FBI is a tribune of the people, battling valiantly against the usurper in the White House.

But Durham's participation casts doubt on that portrayal, given that he is "a widely respected and veteran prosecutor who has investigated C.I.A. torture and broken up Mafia rings," as the Times acknowledges. Having also exposed misconduct within the FBI in the past, and sent a corrupt senior agent to prison, he would also seem well-suited for looking into FBI actions partially based on CIA information.

Also casting doubt on that white hats vs. black hats take on the Trump administration's struggle with the FBI is the fact that the federal law enforcement agency has always been a lousy candidate for people's tribune. It's long been fingered in efforts to muzzle grassroots dissidents, and has repeatedly involved itself in political shenanigans.

"The FBI…has placed more emphasis on domestic dissent than on organized crime and, according to some, let its efforts against foreign spies suffer because of the amount of time spent checking up on American protest groups," the Senate's Church Committee complained in 1976. "The FBI developed new covert programs for disrupting and discrediting domestic political groups, using the techniques originally applied to Communists," that report also noted.

In this case, the techniques used by the FBI against Trump and friends were originally developed for foreign intelligence and anti-terrorist operations.

"The FBI told a secret federal surveillance court in 2016 that it believed Carter Page, a onetime foreign policy aide to President Donald Trump's campaign, 'has been collaborating and conspiring with the Russian government' in its efforts to interfere in the presidential election," USA Today reported last year.

Ironically created as a check on domestic surveillance after the Church Committee report, and then altered by the fear-fueled Patriot Act after the 9/11 terrorist attack, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court is now seen as a poster child of the surveillance state most recently and dramatically unmasked by Edward Snowden.

"The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court is no longer serving its constitutional function of providing a check on the executive branch's ability to obtain Americans' private communications," former Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court participant and U.S. District Court Judge James Robertson wrote in 2015. "Dramatic shifts in technology and law have changed the role of the FISA Court since its creation in 1978—from reviewing government applications to collect communications in specific cases, to issuing blanket approvals of sweeping data collection programs affecting millions of Americans."

Those "sweeping data collection programs" former CIA officer and NSA contractor Snowden reveals in his new book, Permanent Record, make it "technologically feasible for a single government to collect all the world's digital communications, store them for ages, and search through them at will."

That capability makes it possible for the intelligence community and its allies in law enforcement to delve through endless records looking for something to use against anybody who annoys the wrong people. And don't we all have something in our private communications?

President Trump claims he's that "anybody" who has run up against a deep state conspiracy by long-time government employees who actively oppose his elected administration. It's a self-serving appeal to conspiracy theories by a particularly clumsy politician who seems to excel at making his own problems. But, yes, he does have a point.

"Of course, nowhere do the people actually rule," philosopher Karl Popper, author of The Open Society and Its Enemies, pointed out in 1988. "It is governments that rule (and, unfortunately, also bureaucrats, our civil servants—or our uncivil masters, as Winston Churchill called them—whom it is difficult, if not impossible, to make accountable for their actions)."

And our "uncivil masters" do have their own agendas that may be good, bad, or indifferent—and may certainly run contrary to the interests of other factions, or of the people over whom they reign.

"It had become clear, to me at least, that the repeated evocations of terror by the political class were not a response to any specific threat or concern but a cynical attempt to turn terror into a permanent danger that required permanent vigilance enforced by unquestionable authority," Snowden wrote in his book of the arguments fueling the growth of intelligence-state apparatus, such as the FISA Court that authorized a wiretap on Page.

None of this should be taken to mean that Trump is the white hat in the battle against black-hat FBI and intelligence community officials. There is plenty to dislike in Trump's conduct during his campaign, his behavior in office, his use and abuse of power, and his rallying of loyalists against out-groups.

But even if they unseat a president opposed by many Americans, the FBI and the intelligence community are not the heroes you're looking for. They control frightening and secretive powers, and all too often act to advance agendas of their own. The FBI may take down a politician you dislike this year, only to turn its weapons against you in the future.

NEXT: Rep. Dan Crenshaw Claims We Have a 'Very Cost-Effective, Small Footprint' in the Middle East

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You have this weird inverse perspective that is a symptom of the DC Bubble: Trump is the tribune of the People here, and it frankly doesn’t matter if he’s an imperfect representative of the plebs. What is important is the FBI *thinks* he’s the Tribune, and this is how they will treat the common man very soon.

    1. Oh come on. Trump is a bad guy. JD is sure the FBI would never do this to someone he liked. And worse, if they did, it would be different then.

      1. also, this bit JD is doing where “next the FBI may come for you” is just false.

        the FBI will not come for the people cheering on its illegal takedown of the President, because the FBI *works for and is controlled by those people*. They are the System. Where’s the evidence the System will ever eat itself? And how does that help if we’re all dead, in jail, or otherwise marginalized by it in the mean time?

        He’s convincing exactly no one with this article. No Leftist is going to say, “gee, the FBI might come for me some day” because there’s no evidence that’ll ever happen.

        1. They would come for a leftist if said leftist got crossways with the party. The FBI would happily frame Tulsi Gabbard for example or Jill Stein. But no leftist ever thinks they will get cross with the party. They always think being a loyal member of the party will save them. It never does.

          1. I reccomend reading this piece, it lays out the situation with Vindman, Ukraine, forever war, deep state, etc very well:
            http://www.zerohedge.com/political/yes-virginia-there-deep-state-and-its-feeding-anti-potus-mob

        2. No Leftist is going to say, “gee, the FBI might come for me some day” because there’s no evidence that’ll ever happen.

          So you don’t read history then.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

    2. It’s shit like this that got us out of Vietnam. And into the War on Drugs.

      1. This is what the duopoly is supposed to be doing. Infighting instead of passing more stupid laws.

  2. “You don’t have to be a fan of the current president, or of the vindictive way in which he wields power, to recognize that he raises valid concerns about the FBI’s investigation into his presidential campaign’s involvement with Russian interference in the 2016 election.”

    @Reason needs to explain that logic as to how the prior implies the latter.
    If Trump spat on the sidewalk , Reason would want Trump investigated for collusion in the election.

    1. They can’t explain the logic. It is a total non sequiter. One has nothing to do with the other. This entire article is a new low for Reason.

      1. This article was written so Reason’s resident white knights would have something to point to

        1. Basically this. They’ll point to this as proof they dont like the IC next time they get caught jerking it to Amash saying to impeach Trump.

    2. If Trump spat on the sidewalk , Reason would want Trump investigated for collusion in the election.

      That’s not really fair. ENB and Boehm’s takes on this, for example, aren’t necessarily the same across the contributor spectrum. I think Tuccille is simply trying to explain that what we’re seeing with the FBI is a real-time representation of what can happen when a government entity, particularly with law enforcement, is given too much power with too little accountability.

      1. I guess. But all of the endless throat clearing about Trump sure makes it look like he is saying that this is bad because it might happen in other cases but is totally okay to happen here.

        1. In actuality, what the supposedly impartial FBI, CIA, NSA & DOJ, under Obummy, did to Trump as they desperately tried to insure The Wicked Witch would win & then tried to foment a coup of a duly elected prez, is one of the most egregious & heinous high crimes in the history of this nation! No one at Reason ever addresses it as such!

    3. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. The Republicrats are my frenemies.

  3. The Deep State is exactly this desperate because they know that Trump will be reelected and never impeached and removed from office.

    1. The “Deep State” is really bureaucrats. These are people with a job and who whatever personal beliefs they have, do their job. They pass from administration to administration doing what they are charged with. There loyalty is not to a person but to our country. They are loyal to President to the degree that President is loyal to our country. You can not expect them to sit silent or to participate in wrongful actions. Remember that “I was just following orders” has never, nor should ever be an acceptable excuse for anyone.

      1. Sure. But you also do expect them to follow orders and not disobey them because they don’t like the president. That is what is going on here. If Trump ordered them to start gassing people you would have a point. But that is not what is happening. What is happening is they don’t like the results of a lawful election and are trying to overturn it and claim a veto over the electorate.

        So why don’t you start commenting on reality instead of fantasy.

        1. Well, what’s reality and what’s fantasy is a hotly debated topic in this era of alternative facts. Obviously he has a different opinion about the motives of the bureaucrats in question. Personally, I find any claim to absolute knowledge regarding the content’s of others’ minds to suspect at best.

          1. You’re confessing either an unwillingness to be honest or an inability to incorporate consistent logic into critical thought

      2. Nobody in the vast labyrinth of the federal bureaucracy has to follow any orders with which they do not agree. They are not cogs in a machine against their will. If the bureaucrats find their moral compass, or policy preferences, at odds with that of the presiding executive administration, then they should resign their positions. Either do what you are told, or resign. Affirmatively seeking to undermine and disrupt executive functions and policies is not a secret third option.

      3. Remember that “I was just following orders” has never, nor should ever be an acceptable excuse for anyone.

        I don’t know how it is for the FBI, but when I was in the Navy it was made plain to me that I could–and should–disobey unlawful orders. But “unlawful” was not defined as “issued by someone I despise”. You had to be prepared to cite precisely which law was being broken.

        1. As I have been told Navy ship logs will contain notations “order obeyed under protest” counter signed “protest duly noted”.

          Proper reaction to a perceived unlawful order was to raise a question – speak freely or speak off the record to the order-giver over your concerns about the order, and as a last resort openly mutiny. But never ever covertly sabotage the officer. (You might not be part of The Big Picture after all is said and done.)

          What we have are FBI agents deciding “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right?” even before the election and apparently the FBI continuing afterwards in covert mutiny mode.
          Michael S Schmidt, “Top Agent Said F.B.I. Would Stop Trump From Becoming President”, The New York Times, 14 Jun 2018.
          “Peter Strzok and Lisa Page exchanged texts about the F.B.I.’s investigations into the Trump campaign and Hillary Clinton’s email account. New texts released Thursday by the Justice Department’s inspector general show that the F.B.I. agent overseeing the investigation into President Trump’s campaign pledged to stop Mr. Trump from becoming president.”

          1. That is (AFAIK) as close to a coup as the US has ever come.

            1. Nah, Aaron Burr got a lot closer, once.

          2. I’ve always taken their statements to be bluster but I’m coming around.

          3. It’s good to discuss Strzok & Page, because it will prepare many commentators here for their snowflake tears to come when Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz’s next report is released.

            Did Horowitz rake the pair over the coals? You betya: He stated that the Strzok–Page texts “potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations,” and at a minimum, that they “demonstrated extremely poor judgment and a gross lack of professionalism.”

            Did Horowitz find a single solitary ACTION the pair took to be unfair or prejudicial to Donald Trump or anyone? Nope; not even one.

            It’s absolutely hilarious. The clowns in these comments keep talking about an “all-powerful” conspiracy to take the Trump campaign down, but somehow never produce one action this “all-powerful” conspiracy took. Tin-foil-hat buffoons don’t think to test their jokey theories by asking what things didn’t-happen that would-have-happened if their junk nonsense is right.

            For example, if Comey wanted to sabotage Trump’s campaign maybe he (1) wouldn’t have been the only person in a meeting of domestic & foreign intelligence agencies who refused to sign off on a report about Russian interference, or (2) he wouldn’t have been the source for an article “Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia.”in the NY Times one week before the election, or (3) he wouldn’t have virtually installed DJT in the Oval Office with his last-minute Clinton bullshit. Yet there are still clowns here who believe Comey was Deep-State. Because they’re fucking idiots……

            Which brings us back to Horowitz. I don’t doubt he’ll find something to rant and rave over (as consultation prize for the tin-foil-hat clowns) but smart money says those clowns better expect big-time disappointment, big-picture-wise…..

            1. Did Horowitz find a single solitary ACTION the pair took to be unfair or prejudicial to Donald Trump or anyone? Nope; not even one.

              The report hasn’t even been released, and the hicklib thinks he knows what’s in it already.

              This fan fiction was boring back when it was called the Mueller Investigation.

              1. Hey buffoon : Horowitz has already issued a report on Strzok & Page.

                You didn’t know that? Of course not, you being so damn ignorant…

                1. Hey hicklib: your words

                  because it will prepare many commentators here for their snowflake tears to come when Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz’s next report is released

                  I mean, shit, I realize you’re an 85-IQ peckerwood, but at least try to remember what you wrote.

                  1. “Which brings us back to Horowitz. I don’t doubt he’ll find something to rant and rave over (as consultation prize for the tin-foil-hat clowns) but smart money says those clowns better expect big-time disappointment, big-picture-wise…..”

                    Can’t you read ?!?!?

      4. Their selflessness touches me right where I shit.

        1. One more 30+ day federal shutdown should clear out more of them.

          Then send most federal workers to Africa to perform their jobs. Anyone who doesnt go has to quit or be fired. No pensions for them.

      5. I dunno, these dedicated, patriotic public servants spent 4 years knowing that the Secretary of State was wiping her ass with the concepts of transparency, accountability and oversight without a peep.

        It wasn’t a bureaucratic whistleblower who exposed Hillary’s illegal private server.

        1. It wasn’t a bureaucratic whistleblower who exposed Hillary’s illegal private server.

          True. Hilariously, it was a journalist at VICE that inadvertently exposed it when he ended up resorting to FOIA requests for her correspondence during her tenure as Secretary of State, because he kept getting stonewalled by the department.

          1. I had never heard that. Man, I bet that guy gets invited to a cocktail party again. Is he dead yet? I hope he is enjoying whatever his new career is.

        2. Secretary Clinton’s server was not illegal. It certainly was unwise, but there is no law making it illegal. She is a smart enough lawyer to make sure of that before she started.

          1. It was absolutely illegal. Doing government business on personal servers and email accounts are a crime. All of that is subject to FOIA and the national archives. Moreover, the State Department IG investigation found hundreds of pieces of classified information on it every one of which represented a felony. Stop lying.

            1. Using a personal account is not illegal. We have people in the WH today using personal accounts. That means something is being handled on a private server somewhere. And Hillary Clinton was smarter than most companies because her server was never hacked. Finally all that mishandling of classification led to was 38 people getting letters in their personnel files. There were no felony cases even brought forth. So you are wrong.

              1. Just because they decided not to charge them doesn’t mean they didn’t break the law – which her handling of the classified files outside of a secure government network most certainly did. Note, that there are many personal servers at work in the orbit of government, but those servers don’t handle classified information, because that is a first degree felony, and most people don’t think they have the clout to avoid jail time for it. If you read Comey’s letter where he tries to explain why they chose not to charge her, these are exactly the facts as stated.

          2. “Secretary Clinton’s server was not illegal.”
            You
            Are
            Full
            Of
            Shit.
            Official government comm is to be through the official channels, if for no other reason than to provide responses to the FOIA.
            Not to mention, some space between those who maintain them and those who might want some evidence to ‘disappear.

            1. I’m curious how many people here have actually held a security clearance.

              I held a secret clearance back in the early 80s. I have no doubt whatsoever I would be in jail for what Hillary did.

          3. Lefties don’t like FOIA, which is why moderation4ever says such nonsense.

            1. FOIA was written and introduced by Democrats. Just sayin’.

          4. Hillary mishandled classified information as Comey said.

            He just did not refer the case to the DOJ to prosecute.

      6. “These are people with a job and who whatever personal beliefs they have, do their job.” “There loyalty is not to a person but to our country.”

        You CAN’T be this stupid and naive.

      7. Can you stop with the sanctimonious bullshit? Bureaucracy does not have a noble intent. They have agreed for power and money. Pretending they do it “for the country” is fucking idiotic.

      8. The bureaucrat’s loyalty is to the bureaucracy and its survival. Anything and anyone that threatens or disrupts that survival is the enemy.

      9. My sister is a welfare caseworker. Nonetheless, she (who has a nice house, several new vehicles, and a son in college) thinks I’m a bum and parasite because I live in Taiwan and don’t have kids.

        1. And paid less income tax than me, despite her triple my earnings, plus her husband’s earnings at Verizon.

  4. None of this should be taken to mean that Trump is the white hat in the battle against black-hat FBI and intelligence community officials. There is plenty to dislike in Trump’s conduct during his campaign, his behavior in office, his use and abuse of power, and his rallying of loyalists against out-groups.

    So because you don’t like Trump or his supporters, that somehow makes it such that the FBI abusing its powers to try and overturn an election and in the case of Mike Flynn try and frame and imprison his advisers is just two bad guys going at it.

    False equivalence for the win. Whether you like Trump or whether he is a good guy or not is irrelevant. It is just as bad for the FBI to abuse its power and frame the worst person as it is for them to do it to the best person.

    Go fuck yourself JD. You are a phony and a full on scoundrel who defends liberty and ue process just so long as it is easy and it doesn’t get you cross with the fart bubble of 20 something liberal arts majors who literally know nothing that you inhabit.

    1. There is no evidence the FBI abused its powers. President Trump and his campaign staff brought much of this upon themselves. It is pretty hard to defend Mr. Flynn who if he had his way would turn over a dissident to a foreign power that would likely kill that dissident. You need to find someone we could honestly feel for and in Trump’s circle they are few and far between. Maybe Tiffany and Baron.

      1. There is no evidence the FBI abused its powers.

        There is a ton of evidence. They lied to the FISA court to obtain a warrant to spy on Trump’s associates. The fact that the Barr probe is now criminal shows there is evidence that the FBI abused its powers. You don’t make a probe criminal without probable cause that a crime was committed. Barr has that and it is almost certainly involving the FBI.

        President Trump and his campaign staff brought much of this upon themselves. It is pretty hard to defend Mr. Flynn who if he had his way would turn over a dissident to a foreign power that would likely kill that dissident.

        Not only is that untrue, it is also completely irrelevant. I don’t care what Trump did, that doesn’t make it okay for the FBI and CIA to use their FISA powers to spy on him and to spread selatious dirt given to them by Russian intelligence trying to overturn the election. Sorry but your not liking Trump doesn’t make this okay no matter how badly you want it to.

        You need to find someone we could honestly feel for and in Trump’s circle they are few and far between. Maybe Tiffany and Baron.

        Thanks for confirming that you are a complete fascist asshole who thinks that due process and the rule of law only applies to people you like. Go fuck yourself. You are an unprincipled piece of shit.

        1. (1) What evidence “they lied to the FISA court to obtain a warrant to spy on Trump’s associates” ?!? You don’t have any. You have hope, which may yet be rewarded by Durham. Personally, I suspect results like Mueller : Inconclusive & unsatisfying (for John), with a little bit of process prosecuting on the edges, but will see. Right now you have nothing.

          (2) “You don’t make a probe criminal without probable cause that a crime was committed. Barr has that and it is almost certainly involving the FBI” Your first sentence is almost pathetically absurd. Criminal investigation that go nowhere happen everyday. The second sentence is apparently your version of wishful thinking. Again: Based on no fact.

          (3) “I don’t care what Trump did” At last, a wholly honest statement !!!

          (4) “….to spread salacious dirt given to them by Russian intelligence trying to overturn the election”

          Absolutely. Hilarious. That would be the same Russian Intelligence that had Trump’s back throughout the entire election ?!? The same Russian Intelligence that had hackers attacking Ms Clinton’s home computer within twelve hours of Trump asking for Russian assistance? The same Russian Intelligence which started release of the hacked Podesta emails within four hours of the Trump campaign being rocked by the Access Hollywood story?

          Both of those last two facts are documented in the Mueller Report. John’s crap is documented nowhere except in his fanciful imagination.

          (5) “You are an unprincipled piece of shit” says the person who has never stopped making bullshit excuses on Trump trading U.S. favor for private gain. John’s principles on what’s “principled” aren’t very principled IMHO……

          1. “The same Russian Intelligence that had hackers attacking Ms Clinton’s home computer within twelve hours of Trump asking for Russian assistance?”

            This happened? WOW… what did they find?

            1. Your article is an opinion piece citing anonymous sources as ‘proof’ that the FBI lied to the FISA court.

              Can’t you do any better than that?

              1. They clearly lied to the FISA court. They said the Steele dossier was a US intelligence product. Moreover, the Barr investigation was an internal investigation and not criminal. It just became criminal. You can’t open a criminal investigation unless you have probable cause their was a crime committed. Barr is a very smart guy and knows the rules and knows he would be done if he broke them. So, yeah, there were some crimes committed here. Those CIA people are not getting lawyers for nothing. There is still a chance that the Barr investigation will be the second DOJ criminal investigation in history after the one into Hillary’s emails that doesn’t result in indictments, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

                1. (1) “They said the Steele dossier was a US intelligence product” John, that’s one of the stupidest lies you ever told. It can’t stand up to even five minutes of research. Not only was the FISA court told the Dossier was privately collected, they were also told it was funded by a political opponent of Trump. Why do you tell such obvious lies?

                  (2) Then we move to the obviously stupid: the “second DOJ criminal investigation in history” that doesn’t result in indictments ?!? John, that is mouth-open-in-awe shit-for-brains imbecility. Saying worthless garbage like that may work when you having a Trump-Cult-Circle-Jerk, but there are normal people in these comments ( Like Me !!! ). What are they supposed to make of a statement that brain-dead?

                  1. http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/419901-fbi-email-chain-may-provide-most-damning-evidence-of-fisa-abuses-yet

                    The email exchanges included then-FBI Director James Comey, key FBI investigators in the Russia probe and lawyers in the DOJ’s national security division, and they occurred in early to mid-October, before the FBI successfully secured a FISA warrant to spy on Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

                    The email exchanges show the FBI was aware — before it secured the now-infamous warrant — that there were intelligence community concerns about the reliability of the main evidence used to support it: the Christopher Steele dossier.

                    The exchanges also indicate FBI officials were aware that Steele, the former MI6 British intelligence operative then working as a confidential human source for the bureau, had contacts with news media reporters before the FISA warrant was secured.

                    The FBI fired Steele on Nov. 1, 2016 — two weeks after securing the warrant — on the grounds that he had unauthorized contacts with the news media.

                    But the FBI withheld from the American public and Congress, until months later, that Steele had been paid to find his dirt on Trump by a firm doing political opposition research for the Democratic Party and for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and that Steele himself harbored hatred for Trump.

                    If the FBI knew of his media contacts and the concerns about the reliability of his dossier before seeking the warrant, it would constitute a serious breach of FISA regulations and the trust that the FISA court places in the FBI.

                    That’s because the FBI has an obligation to certify to the court before it approves FISA warrants that its evidence is verified, and to alert the judges to any flaws in its evidence or information that suggest the target might be innocent.

                    We now know the FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet.

                    It took like two seconds to find that. The FBI lied on the FISA warrants. That is established fact.

              2. “”Your article is an opinion piece citing anonymous sources as ‘proof’ “”

                Isn’t that the new standard?

            2. Your article is also by John Solomon, who has had more “Super Sensational News-Breaking Exposés” (!!!!) collapse into empty nothingness than I have hair follicles on my head.

              To be fair, I am thinning a bit on top….

          2. “The same Russian Intelligence that had hackers attacking Ms Clinton’s home computer within twelve hours of Trump asking for Russian assistance? ”
            That line right there evinces what a fascist proggie Donk-apologist you are and negates anything else you ever write as fucktard drivel.

            Go DIAF.

        2. They lied to the FISA court to obtain a warrant to spy on Trump’s associates.

          What was the lie?

          1. They said that the Steele Dossier was a product of US intelligence rather than a piece of opposition research funded by Hillary. That was straight up perjury. Also, the two people who were the impetus of the entire thing were Mark Halprin and Msfud, both of whom were CIA assets. So, the CIA fed information to the FBI which the FBI then used to get a FISA warrant. The entire thing was a fraud.

            1. “Mark Halprin and Msfud, both of whom were CIA assets”

              Fact-free fantasy-world strikes again. I won’t ask for proof. I know you have nothing…..

              1. “…I won’t ask for proof. I know you have nothing….”

                Oh, go ahead.
                You’ve had your hat AND your ass handed to you every time you’re caught bullshitting.
                Which is pretty much every time you post.

            2. John : “They said that the Steele Dossier was a product of US intelligence rather than a piece of opposition research funded by Hillary.“

              No matter how often you repeat that lie, it’s still easily disproved. The FISA court was told this :

              “…conduct research regarding Candidate #1,” Donald Trump, and Trump’s “ties to Russia,” and that the man who hired him was “likely looking for information that could be used to discredit [Trump’s] campaign.”

              Question : Why do you lie, John?

              Answer : Because you have nothing but lies to support your side.

        3. “The fact that the Barr probe is now criminal shows there is evidence that the FBI abused its powers.”

          By the logic above the fact the Speaker Pelosi has called for a formal vote on impeachment proceedings shows there is proof the President violated his oath of office. President Trump should therefore save the country a divisive process and resign now.

          1. No its not. There must be probable cause that a crime was committed to open a criminal investigation. Pelosi can call for anything she wants.

            1. But Speaker Pelosi did not do that. She had the information to roll out impeachment. If Barr has probable case let us see it. But he doesn’t like to share things.

    2. Are you crying right now, John? I think somebody needs a nap. Go find your blankie and your safe space, just because somebody said something bad about your Lord and Savior is no reason to throw a temper tantrum and call them a big meanie poopy-head.

      1. It warms my heart to realize I get under your skin so badly you can’t even make a coherent argument anymore and instead just spew whatever this is you are spewing.

        You are not my favorite stupid person to pick on on here, but you are certainly going up the list.

      2. “…somebody said something bad about your Lord and Savior…”

        Ah yes.
        Pointing out that the FBI has acted illegally is this pile of bullshit from TDS victims.

      3. Wow, that would be a stinging retort back in fifth grade.

        Anyway, the FBI acted illegally and you getting supermad and calling names isn’t going to change that.

    3. This Propaganda fits right in with what reason is selling.

  5. The entire concept that judges — that is, individuals with no independent investigative powers or ability to factually assess the foundations of any claims being by the intelligence community — are capable of acting as an effective check on the executive branch, under the guise of a secret court, is absurd and should be done away with. To call the FISA court a rubber-stamp is understating the problem significantly, in my opinion. Further, who monitors the secret court?

    Congress should assume these oversight duties and if there are any problems uncovered, at least the voters can hold the right people accountable. How do you hold a FISA judge accountable? You don’t. And what stops a nefarious FBI agent or CIA operative arguing that everything they did, no matter how deceptive or unethical, was done with the imprimatur of a judge?

    The entire system needs a serious overhaul.

    1. All true. But here is the problem, Congress is aware of nearly everything that goes on and is okay with it. I guarantee you key members of both parties in Congress new about this and participated in it. So, I don’t know what good putting Congress in charge will do.

      1. It removes one layer of obfuscation, which is why it will never be done. Congress erected that layer of obfuscation for precisely this reason.

        1. Yes. It would mean Congress would be accountable for what went on. And Congress is never going to make itself accountable.

      2. I agree. But, at the very least, if a member of Congress is revealed to have been at the helm when a bevy of abuses was being perpetrated right under their nose, the voters will have a choice to make. As it stands now, the entire FISA scheme hinges on a the judgments of a secret court whose members are not elected and, in practice, cannot be removed from their posts no matter how egregious the misconduct. The court can always say, “Well, we were lied to.” The secret police can always say, “Well, the judge signed off on everything we did, sir.”

        Mutual duplicity carries with it the attendant baggage of a strong legal defense for most crimes. Being duped and getting a seal of approval are two sides of the same coin. The only branch that cannot rely on such a symbiosis to evade consequences is Congress. The political liability is always there, whereas it does not exist for judges, or for law enforcement.

        1. I don’t think your idea is bad. It would help but I am skeptical that it would solve the problem. I am ready to just get rid of these agencies altogether.

          1. At the end of the day, a country needs spies. It is a grotesque reality, but a reality it is nonetheless. Maximum accountability, therefore, should be the goal and, if the entire impeachment circus has taught us anything, the only real accountability upon which we can rely is political in nature. Politicians value their jobs more than their freedom and it far easier, all things considered, to take away their jobs.

            1. We need spies. But we don’t need these spies. Get rid of these organizations, fire everyone in them. Then rebuild new ones in their place with the severed heads of the old ones standing as a reminder of what happens to spies who decide they can dabble in politics.

              1. I agree. Can it be done? Probably not. I think it will take some truly monumental revelations of misconduct, and more than a few high level convictions, before anyone in Congress will even entertain dismantling the existing intelligence apparatus.

                Is it possible Barr and Durham uncover something of that magnitude? Perhaps. Still, even if they do, I think a good deal of the current crop of Democratic elites will need to kick the bucket before there is any prospect of the type of bipartisan razing you are envisioning. The Pelosis, Clintons, Bidens, Schiffs, Nadlers, and Schumers of the world will never look upon their complicity in these schemes with even an ounce of regret or reflection. They will take their pride to the grave, without question.

                1. It can be done by shrinking government by 75%+

                  The natural Achilles heal of large government is small budgets so the bureaucrats must pick and chose where to spend the money.

                  As it stands now, we have far too many spy agencies, spy courts, and federal police that spy because Washington DC is flush with taxpayer money.

                  Make Congress part time where they meet a few times a month.

              2. “We need spies. But we don’t need these spies. Get rid of these organizations, fire everyone in them. Then rebuild new ones in their place with the severed heads of the old ones standing as a reminder of what happens to spies who decide they can dabble in politics”

                What a delightful example of cult fanaticism in action !! Poor little John has this whole ludicrous story of Deep State conspiracy against Trump rooted in his fevered brain. One is almost afraid of trying to slowly re-introduce him to reality, for fear his head will explode. You wonder what he believes is the point of his own nonsense? All his villains – FBI, CIA, Comey & McCabe in fact DID NOT use what they knew about Trump during the election. McCabe has already been cleared by the Inspector General for his (AC’s) actual investigative actions while handling Trump matters. Comey fought the joint intelligence finding on Russian interference, downplayed Russia’s actions in the press, and then handed the election to Trump with his last minute Clinton shenanigans. John’s fevered tin-foil-hat fantasies are contradicted by everyone’s actions being the exact opposite of what you’d expect if this “conspiracy” was real. That’s a problem that will never go away.

                Some facts :

                1. The investigation of Trump’s campaign didn’t begin with a deep-state-conspiracy, but because a campaign aide got drunk and told a foreign diplomat the Russians would produce dirt on Ms Clinton. I know right-wing-world is laboring extra, extra hard to destroy that fact. Unfortunately, their counter-realty gibberish is extra, extra stupid…

                2. The special counsel investigation didn’t begin by deep-state-conspiracy, but because Trump bragged about firing Comey to Russian Ambassador Kislyak & Foreign Minister Lavrov, saying “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.” This was in the Oval Office no less. He then pretty much admitted the same on a live TV interview.

                We learned many things from Mueller’s investigation. A limited list includes :

                1. Trump’s NSA nominee lied to the Vice President about his contacts with Russia

                2. Trump’s campaign head gave private briefings to a man the CIA considered a Russian agent

                3. Trump’s son-in-law lied during his security clearance about contacts w/ Russia.

                4. He also asked to use the Russian’s secure communication lines to elude American intelligence monitoring.

                5. Trump’s son was told the Russia government wanted to secretly aid DJT’s election. Trump Jr replied: “I love it.”

                6. Trump’s fixer, Cohen, secretly negotiated a massive Moscow business deal with Kremlin officials right up the very eve of the election.

                7. Cohen lied about these negotiations, even when testifying under oath.

                8. Trump lied about his Russian business dealings when repeatedly asked specific questions during the campaign

                9. Russian agents were recorded during the campaign saying they would use Manafort and Flynn to influence Trump.

                10. Trump’s fixer, Cohen received an email from Giorgi Rtskhiladze, a go-between to Russia : “Stopped the flow of tapes from Russia but not sure if there’s anything else. Just so you know.” In testimony to prosecutors on 04 April 2018, he said this referred to compromising tapes rumored to be held by people affiliated w/ Russian billionaire Aras Agalarov, who partnered with Trump hosting the 2013 Miss Universe pageant. Rtskhiladze did not know if the tapes were real.

                What’s listed above would have triggered an investigation of anyone not-named-Trump. Why does John think Trump needs the “Deep State” when his conduct draws attention? It was stupidity, venality, dishonesty and sleaze by Trump and his family/hand-picked associates that earned the investigation, not tin-foil-hat deep-state bullshit…..

                1. Every single word of this is untrue. It is all a complete lie. If it were true, we wouldn’t be talking about this bullshit because Mueller would have concluded he worked with the Russians instead of saying there was no evidence he did.

                  You don’t have a single source for any of it. You are just posting make up talking points from last year that all turned out to be completely untrue. You are fooling no one.

                  1. I’m curious, John. Let’s say I decided to produce a dozen sources for each fact above, which wouldn’t be hard. Now, granted, you should get off your lazy ass and do a little research on your own, however painful you find the results. But apparently being a Trump Cultist is a lazy man’s hobby, so I don’t expect too much. So :

                    (1) Would a dozen sources be enuff? I’m guessing not.

                    (2) At least half of the above was admitted under oath by the person involved. Would that be enough? I’m guessing not.

                    (3) Ever try to take a slimy eel off a fishing hook – with it twisting, squirming, wiggling and squirting from your hand? Let’s supposed I actually managed to get you to confront all the facts above. Would it change anything in your cult-like beliefs? I’m guessing not.

                    1. You can’t produce shit. You are just posting bullshit and wasting everyone’s time. You are a smiley piece of shit troll using sock puppets to fuck up the thread and cause problems. No one cares what you think more than the effort it takes to tell you to fuck off.

                    2. The quote about Giorgi Rtskhiladze is in the Mueller report, page 239 of 448 in the attached link of the full report.

                      https://tinyurl.com/yxven6bx

                      Here’s a bonus quote while you’re chewing on that :

                      “The Washington Post published an Access Hollywood video that
                      captured comments by candidate Trump some years earlier and that was expected to adversely affect the Campaign. Less than an hour after the video’s publication, WikiLeaks released the
                      first set of emails stolen by the GRU from the account of Clinton Campaign chairman John Podesta”

                      In case you don’t know, the GRU is Russian Intelligence – helping Donald John Trump thru a perilous point in his campaign. That quote is found on page 66 of 448.

                    3. So Trump coordinated with the GRU? About the Hillary emails? That she kpet on her private illegal server?

                      Oooooooooookay….

                    4. “So Trump coordinated with the GRU?”

                      (1) Trump made a public statement asking the Russians to hack Hillary Clinton.

                      (2) The GRU responded almost immediately, as described on page 57 of 448 in the Mueller Report:

                      “Within approximately five hours of Trump’s statement, GRU officers targeted for the first time Clinton’s personal office. After candidate Trump’s remarks, Unit 26165 created and sent
                      malicious links targeting 15 email accounts at the domain (redacted), including an email account belonging to Clinton aide (redacted). The investigation did not find evidence of earlier
                      GRU attempts to compromise accounts hosted on this domain.”

                      Mueller only describes how quickly Russian Intelligence acted on Trump’s request, just like the acted even faster to help Trump’s campaign when the Access Hollywood story broke. Mueller doesn’t draw any conclusions about “coordination”.

                      Later, of course, we’ll read a transcript of Trump coordinating political collusion from a foreign government. By that point the chant “No Collusion” will seem a quaint old memory….

                    5. I apologize for the jumbled text in the quote. Cutting & pasting text with redactions is more difficult tan I thought…..

                    6. Russia hacked the DNC servers. Not Hillary’s private server.

                      If they did hack her private server then Hillary herself would be on the hook for the lack of security since it was her personal server. I have never heard any report, please post if you know of one that says her personal email server was hacked. I do remember talk about how it could have been hacked. And I vaguely remember those reports saying there was no evidence.

                      Also, I twice posted a link where Steele testified in court documents that Hillary’s camp paid for the dossier and that the purpose of the dossier was so Hillary could contest the election. But for some reason the posts went down the rabbit hole.

                    7. There is no reliable evidence that Russia hacked the DNC.
                      All there is is the word of a DNC contractor/donor (aka crony) who claims to have examined the server. An anti-Russian Ukrainian oligarch. And the server was carefully kept away from anyone that even approached being a neutral party.
                      On top of all that bullshit, it seems Wikileaks Vault_7 is memory holed even among “libertarians”. That would be the release of internal CIA documents detailing their work spoofing evidence to make it look like CIA hacks were done by other, specific entities

                    8. Jesus Bloody Christ, TrickVic.

                      Will you try to keep up? Just try. Even if you aren’t capable enough I’d still appreciate the effort.

                      (1) Yes, the GRU hacked the DNC after phishing John Podesta. They funneled the results thru Julian Assange, starting the slow release of emails less than one hour after the Access Hollywood story broke, and Trump’s campaign was at its most vulnerable.

                      (2) The GRU also hacked the RNC but released nothing, because Donnie was their boy.

                      (3) The GRU attempted to hack Ms Clinton’s home computer well after she was no longer Secretary of State. Given this followed Trump’s public plea to Russia even YOU should have been able to work out that chronology.

                      (4) The account of this is on page 57 of 448 in the Mueller Report, but I already told you that, didn’t I?

                      (5) Sympathy for your posting problems, but I still can’t let this moronic nonsense pass :

                      “…..link where Steele testified in court documents that Hillary’s camp paid for the dossier and that the purpose of the dossier was so Hillary could contest the election. But for some reason the posts went down the rabbit hole”

                      The purpose of the dossier was NOT so Clinton could contest the election, because ninety-nine percent of everyone thought she would win (HC included). It was opposition research she decided not to use, and the FISA court was told it was opposition research.

                      PS : What I’ve found is links don’t post if they exceed a certain number of characters. I use a URL reduction program, tho there are other solutions.

                  2. Mueller did conclude many of the above things. You need to takes some time and read his report. You will find that there was extensive contacts between Russian and the Trump campaign. These contacts did not rise to the level of conspiracy. You will also find that Russian agents worked extensively to influence our 2016 election. That does not mean the outcome would be different if they had not been active but it is something we must work to prevent in the future.

                    1. The Russians had two guys posting on facebook. Yeah, that caused millions of people in the Midwest to decide to vote for Trump. Hillary being the worst and most corrupt candidate in history had nothing to do with it. Moreover, you can’t on the one hand claim to be so concerned about foreign interference in the election and then on the other hand demand that Trump be impeached because he asked the Ukraine to investigate such interference. And that is what you and the rest of your sock puppets are doing. It is absurd. Now go away.

                    2. Moderation4ever
                      October.30.2019 at 3:32 pm
                      “Mueller did conclude many of the above things…”

                      Cite missing.

                    3. The item about Kushner asking to use the Russian’s secure communication lines? Pages 168-169 of 448

                    4. Donald Trump Jr was promised under-the-table dirt on Hillary from the Russian government as :

                      “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” Trump Jr. immediately responded that “if it’s what you say I love it,”

                      He then arranged the Trump Tower meeting meeting through a series of emails and telephone calls. The quote above is found in the Mueller Report on page 118 of 448.

                    5. The part about National Security Adviser nominee Flynn lying to Vice President Flynn and the FBI about his contacts with Russia?

                      You can find the start of that sordid tale on pages 241-243/448

                    6. “”Mueller did conclude many of the above things””

                      How can you come to a conclusion about things in a report that you didn’t read?

                      The hearing made it obvious that Mueller wasn’t familiar with his own report.

                    7. To GRB. Thanks for providing the citations SERVO requested. Guess at least two of us read the report.

                    8. You do realize that the Trump Tower meeting was a set up by Steele’s employer, Fusion GPS – whose CEO met with the Russian lawyer immediately before and after her unsuccessful attempt at entrapment

                    9. Did Christopher Steele or Fusion GPS force Don Jr. to attend the Trump Tower meeting too?

                    10. The Trump Tower meeting was set up by one Donald Trump Jr.

                      Black is not white.
                      Up is not down.
                      2+2≠5

                      Junior was told the Russian government wanted to secretly aid Daddy’s campaign. Trump Jr replied: “I love it.” and immediately set up the meeting. Now, right-wing-world has developed a whole other tin-foil theory Junior was “tricked” into setting up the meeting, just like Flynn was “tricked” into lying his ass off to the FBI, just like Papadopoulos was “tricked” into getting drunk and talking garbage to virtual stranger.

                      So let’s school another conspiracy freak in basic logic : If Junior was “tricked”, why? The account of his sleazy shenanigans didn’t emerge until months after the election. It would have been damn handy for the Deep State to release a report of this meeting before the election, don’t ya think? (wait a minute – I forgot you don’t think).

                      In fact, if the Clown-in-Chief hadn’t fired the FBI director and then bragged about it to Russian Ambassador Kislyak & Foreign Minister Lavrov (“I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.”) then there would have been no Mueller and the Tower Meeting would have never been exposed.

                      What on earth were the Conspirators thinking ?!?!

                    11. And yet, no one was indicted for collusion outside of people for unrelated process crimes, despite the supposed multiple instances of collusion you’re claiming here. Furthermore, it looks like Flynn’s about to have his case thrown out because Page and Sztrok were fucking around with his 302s.

                      LOL at “Conspirators.”

                    12. Grb doesn’t realize most of what he posted was unverified information. The report even states there was no verifying of said evidence.

                      Grb also fails to report from Mueller how after the election Putin scrambled to establish a channel to congratulate Trump, emailing the press secretary. a move unnecessary if channels had already been established.

                      But jeff, mod, and grb are dishonest dumbasses.

                    13. Oh, this is also a verification that grb is a paid troll from Code Blue. They all post the same cites. Cherry picking them out of context.

                    14. I admit it. JesseAz is such a scuzzy lying clown, there’s a certain ugly fascination to his weaseling – like looking at a gross highway accident when you know you should turn away. But “Code Blue” ?!?!?

                      Two points :

                      (1) Our Jesse is so much the willing dupe of his handlers he thinks everyone else is processed meat like himself. But some of us think, you know, independent-like. Why not give it a try…..

                      (2) “Code Blue” ?!?!?

                      Wikipedia : Code Blue may refer to:

                      Code Blue a hospital code indicating a patient requiring immediate resuscitation

                      Code Blue (film), a 2011 Dutch film by Urszula Antoniak

                      Code Blue (TV series), a Japanese drama series

                      Code Blue (album), a 1990 album by Icehouse

                      Code Blue (bull), a bucking bull

                      Code Blue – Emergency, a 1987 scifi novel by James White

                      Code: Blue, a fictional organization in the Marvel Universe

                      “Code Blue”, a song by T.S.O.L. from Dance with Me

                      It’s Jesse, so who knows? I’m going Marvel Universe……

                2. Trying again. The link is in this article

                  Steele

      3. “”Congress is aware of nearly everything that goes on and is okay with it. “”

        I bet not. Perhaps a small group of Congress knows this. And that might have been reduced to the gang of 8.

  6. >>Even if they unseat a president opposed by many Americans, the FBI and the intelligence community are not the heroes you’re looking for.

    dude this is just fucking backwards I can’t even.

    1. What is backwards about this?

      1. It implies that the FBI unseating an “unpopular President” in JD’s view is a good thing. JD is saying the FBI and CIA are bad in spite of that in that sentence. Ah, no, they are bad in part at least because of that. It is seriously fucked up.

        1. If this state of affairs keeps up, the peaceful and orderly transition of power in this country will be a thing of the past. Every incoming administration, faced with the prospect of internal resistance and sabotage, will have to start sacking *everyone* that worked for the previous administration and replacing them with proven loyalists; the next administration will have to do the same thing; and on and on it will go until, one day, the federal bureaucracy is operated entirely by a revolving door of janitors, interns, and social justice majors.

          1. >>>will have to start sacking *everyone*

            every US attorney fired by Bill Clinton on line 1.

          2. They want to throw their opponents in prison. The reason why Caesar became a dictator was because he knew that if he didn’t take his army across the Rubicon and show up in Rome with it, the Optimates were going to have him executed. Once you get into a situation were people see losing as meaning their going to prison or death, they become tyrants out of self preservation even if they never intended or even wanted to be one.

            That is where we are headed if this shit doesn’t stop.

            1. Lefties dont like Rule of Law that is equally applied, so they try to make sure Rule of Law doesnt apply to them.

              Trump is readying the equal application of Rule of Law after he wins this reelection and Democrats know it. The Democrats left a trail of Lefty tears because they assumed Hillary would be Prez and this shit would have been #MemoryHoled

            2. They want to throw their opponents in prison.

              And this is why we can’t have intelligent conversations on the matter.

              I am completely willing to believe that the FBI screwed up and made mistakes. Perhaps even criminal ones. If they did, they absolutely should be held accountable for that.

              I am also willing to believe that some FBI agents may have had their judgment clouded by ideology at least to a certain extent. If that did happen then I think those individuals ought to be held accountable for that.

              But no, you take that all the way to eleventy and proclaim that they see themselves as launching a coup and throwing opponents in prison like some type of Inquisition.

              Can we lay off the hyperbole and stick to the realm of actual verifiable facts?

              1. But no, you take that all the way to eleventy and proclaim that they see themselves as launching a coup and throwing opponents in prison like some type of Inquisition.

                They already framed Mike Flynn. Maxine Waters and Gerald Nadler to name two have said repeatedly they want to throw Trump in prison. Every Progressive I know and I know a lot of them would happily see Trump shot and certainly live in the daily hope that he and everyone who voted for him is locked up in prison forever. Stop lying and claiming that progressives haven’t lost their minds over this. They have.

                1. They already framed Mike Flynn.

                  According to Flynn’s lawyers, they sure did! Do you have any actual proof of this beyond the claims of Flynn’s own lawyers?

                  Maxine Waters and Gerald Nadler to name two have said repeatedly they want to throw Trump in prison.

                  Last I checked, they are Members of Congress, not FBI employees. Democrats criticize Republicans. In other news, dog bites man.

                  I don’t think it’s becoming of a statesman to be making hyperbolic claims like that. I wouldn’t have advised them to do that. But it’s also not the same as “DEEP STATE FBI” saying the same thing.

                  Every Progressive I know and I know a lot of them would happily see Trump shot and certainly live in the daily hope that he and everyone who voted for him is locked up in prison forever.

                  Oh this is just bullshit. I have no doubt that there are some demented progressives who want to murder all the conservatives, just like Shithead here on these forums repeatedly claim to want to murder all the progressives. They are nowhere near a majority of them. Shithead and his eliminationst fantasies doesn’t speak for you, and fringe nutball shitposters on the left don’t speak for all progressives either.

                  1. //According to Flynn’s lawyers, they sure did! Do you have any actual proof of this beyond the claims of Flynn’s own lawyers?//

                    Flynn’s lawyers didn’t just pull this theory out of thin air, they relied on government documents. Take a look, if you have the time: https://www.scribd.com/document/432006309/Agreed-Redacted-Reply-Brief

                    1. Interesting. Do you have the FBI’s side of the story?

                      I mean, you wouldn’t expect me to simply accept one side of the story as the complete truth, would you?

                    2. All you do is post hot takes from Vox, so yes, that is your preferred MO.

                    3. By the way, if you weren’t so fucking ignorant you would know the DoJ response is due on Nov 1st with a defense reply on the 4th. This isnt meritless. The judge has ordered the response on all counts found in the brief.

                      But you’re fucking ignorant on any actual evidence, so fuck off.

                    4. Plus, we knew the case against Flynn was questionable from the jump. The FBI officers who conducted the interviews upon which charges were based have said they did not believe he lied.

                      By that metric alone, you would think you could get to reasonable doubt. I mean, if the guys he was talking to have doubts….

                      But that ain’t how it works with federal prosecutors – even if there isn’t a politically charged investigation underway and you are targeted not for you actions but as a lever point to force testimony against bigger fish.

                2. John : “They already framed Mike Flynn”

                  How? You made the assertion, you should be able to explain your own comically bad reasoning. I wonder if you’re even capable of that, so I’ll help you out: Right-wing-world says this : Yes, National Security Adviser nominee Michael Flynn did lie to the Vice President about his Russian contacts, and he did then lie to FBI agents in an interview, but the poor little thing didn’t understand lying to those agents was a culpable issue.

                  I’m. Not. Kidding.

                  The whole “Flynn was Framed” garbage is because the agents were “so unfair” to a former Lt General and White House official who “didn’t understand” lying thru this teeth to the FBI could be a problem.

                  Has snowflakish-whining bullshit ever been so absurd?

                  1. Read the brief: https://www.scribd.com/document/432006309/Agreed-Redacted-Reply-Brief

                    Seems pretty clear that Flynn was set up. After you have read it, let’s have a discussion and we can address the substantive points.

                    1. Why don’t you try explaining how your precious brief challenges a single word I wrote because [newsflash] it doesn’t. Let’s pull out the core quote :

                      “In this case, high ranking FBI officials orchestrated an ambush interview of the new president’s National Security Adviser, not for the purposes of discovering any evidence of criminal activity – they already had tapes of all the relevant conversations about which they questioned Mr. Flynn – but for the purpose of trapping him into making statements they could allege as false”

                      OK, let’s dig into this touching sob story :

                      (1) Flynn didn’t make statements “they could allege as false”; Flynn lied thru his teeth.

                      (2) The agents didn’t “orchestrate” anything; they asked questions and Flynn lied.

                      (3) They didn’t “trap” Flynn into lying; he did that all on his own

                      (4) I concede they didn’t warn Flynn to stop lying. Do you really think that’s common in law enforcement?

                      (5) I’m still trying to understand how someone reached the top ranks of United States Army command – worked as a upper tier official in the White House – yet still claims he didn’t understand the consequences of serial lying during a FBI interview. Maybe you can explain that? (if you can spare a moment from weeping over the injustice to poor Michael Flynn)

                      (6) I don’t think a street-corner ghetto crack dealer would get off on this technicality. Will it work for a rich white Republican? Who knows…..

                      (7) I want to see this reasoning applied everywhere : “When the agents questioned Mr. Clinton they weren’t actually interested in whether he had sex with an intern, they already had the blue dress……”

                      (8) It could revolutionize law enforcement !

                  2. “Seems pretty clear that Flynn was set up”

                    How was Flynn “set up” to lie to Vice President Pence about Russia?

                    How was Flynn “set up” so a Lt. General and former high White House official didn’t understand the repercussions of repeated lying to FBI agents? Flynn didn’t know that could be a problem ?!? He was “set up” because no one warned him that could be a problem ?!?

                    If some ghetto crack dealer peddled excuses so thin you’d treat him and his excuses with contempt. Why should Flynn get a better reception for his self-serving weaseling?

                    1. You are asking questions as though you weren’t just provided with a direct source to the underlying document. Read the brief. If you can. Maybe you can’t, which is fine; but – if you can’t – then have the decency to bow out of the conversation rather than continuing to ask stupid questions.

            3. This from Chem “hyperbole” Jeff.

            4. John : “The reason why Caesar became a dictator was because he knew that if he didn’t take his army across the Rubicon and show up in Rome with it, the Optimates were going to have him executed”

              Jeez – I was almost floored by a heart attack, because John and myself actually agree on something, even if it’s only Roman History in the last days of the Republic.

              One caveat : The ultimate penalty for the Roman elite was usually exile, not death. An example is the thug Titus Annius Milo, who murdered Clodius (quite the thug himself). Milo was tried in epic Republic style, with armed troops ominously circling the jurors. Cicero defended Milo (Marcus Tullius loathed Clodius), but the poor dear was so shaken by soldiers and crowd he could barely deliver his speech. But the penalty was only exile to Massilia (today’s Marseille. We should all be so unlucky).

              Recovering his self-esteem, Cicero sent Milo a fine copy of the speech he had intended to give. Milo replied he was fortunate the speech wasn’t been made, otherwise, he would “not now be enjoying the delicious red mullet of Massilia”.

              Of course, for Caesar exile would have been worse than death, so the same logic applies….

              1. “The ultimate penalty for the Roman elite was usually exile, not death”

                Somebody has never heard of proscription.
                They declared Caesar an outlaw. That is not exile, you liar.
                Being declared an outlaw meant that you literally existed outside the law – life and property were forfeit to whoever was able to take it.

              2. The proscriptions only occurred once in the Republic, during the previous dictatorship of Sulla. Nobody was facing proscription at the time Caesar took his troops across the Rubicon, and they wouldn’t until well after Caesar’s death, during the Second Triumvirate of Octavius, Marcus Antonius, and Lepidus. That was when Cicero died, btw.

                Besides, you entirely miss the point. Caesar’s action against the Republic was forced by danger to himself, as John said; but the danger was legal. Caesar demanded the right to stand for Counsel a second time in absentia, while still holding proconsul rank at the head of his army. He then held legal immunity, and would have legal immunity after being elected Counsel.

                The Optimates (as John said) were Caesar’s enemies, looking to destroy him. But their plan was to bring him to trial for “irregularities” in his first consulship, or charge that he exceeded his authority during the wars in Gaul. And the result of that trial would not be death, but exile (as I said).

                How much of a risk Caesar faced is much debated by historians. Caesar was wildly popular, wealthy from his war spoils, and the charges were tenuous in the extreme by the brutal standards of Republic politics. But major Roman legal cases were rarely settled by fact. If Pompey Magnus (who held the most power then) was satisfied just seeing Caesar humiliated, he would certainly be acquitted. But if he wanted Caesar destroyed, the result would be exile. No one knew what Pompey would do, probably not even Pompey himself…..

                1. *consul

                  Caesar was declared an enemy of the state.
                  It was supposed to be symbolic and vetoed, but it wasn’t.
                  Thus he chose from 2 options: marching on Rome to enforce his rights and take on corruption, or spend the rest of his life hiding around the world and begging for sanctuary, awaiting the day someone would be sent to assassinate him like Hannibal.
                  That you could read history and still end up a deep state shill is an indication of the lowest character, but we also have the rest of your posts to conclude that.

                  And Pompey wasn’t pulling any strings. He was a fucking joke that went along with people like Cato and Cicero because they needed muscle and he needed validation.

                2. Sigh. Four Points:

                  (1) You clearly don’t know shit about this.

                  (2) One issue (and one issue alone) let to Caesar’s march on Rome : Whether he could stand for election for Consul (touche) while still holding imperium as a proconsul, with all the legal immunity that provided. If he could, there would be no exposure to being brought to trial between his time governing a province (legal immunity) and his time holding the consulship (legal immunity). For three whole years, 51-49 BC, factions in the Senate fought over when Caesar’s command would expire and whether he would be allowed to run for Consul beforehand. He was originally given the right to run in absentia, but Pompey had snatched it away with the kind of ham-fisted back-stabbing machinations he was famous for. Caesar options were (1) march on Rome, or (2) go to Rome without legal protection, facing either exile or the humiliation of needing Pompey’s protection. Why the fuck would he flounce around the world, when the worse-case of a trial (that he well might win) was exile anyway? And exactly zero people would chase him into exile to assassinate him. God knows where you got that dumb-ass shit. As for Pompey, I do agree he was looking for validation in realigning himself with the Boni – so you have one thing right. But you seem to have forgot that Magnus had an army (several in fact), whereas Cato had a name & Cicero a sweet tongue. Guess who’s top dog there?

                  Incidentally, you’ll probably never find a more overrated bungling buffoon in history than Cato. Just saying…..

                  (3) I’m puzzling over your “deep state shill” claptrap, since it makes no sense at all. In the end? You’re a hack & hacks gotta hack.

                  (4) Which leads me to a general observation : About twenty years ago I used to play basketball on a church court during lunch hour. My opponents were half my age & my game always had pronounced limitations, leading to one rude kid asking why I bothered.

                  I didn’t think the question fair. I sank a bucket or two a game, snarfed up rebounds and had a sweet pass or defensive play occasionally. But here? Nardz, you’re all air balls, useless fouls, and turnovers. You make ten stupid plays for every smart one (if that). Your game is clumsy, inefficient and ugly. So why are you in this comments section? Why do you bother?

      2. white hats and black hats. JD’s world is photo-negative.

    2. I thought we had these things called elections to unseat unpopular Presidents. Foolish me. How could anyone write something as stupid as the sentence you quote?

      1. JD … rooting for the Empire

        1. To be fair, JD assumes the Empire will reward him for his “service”.

  7. The FBI may take down a politician you dislike this year, only to turn its weapons against you in the future.

    Lol. No. This debacle has proved conclusively that the intelligence community is aligned firmly with one political faction against all others. They’ll never move to act against the interests of your globalist paymasters.

    1. No they will not. And they won’t turn on anyone who will play ball with them and not hold them accountable. They are claiming a veto power over the electorate. But that is no big deal in this case because Orange Man Bad or something.

      1. John (and similar intellectually challenged conservatives) can glance at 25 pages of text containing 75 facts and 39 links (citations), and said summarize article by saying “Orange Man Bad or something”, declare victory, and smugly walk away, thinking that they have “won”.

        So John, you are saying, “data and facts are needless and icky-poo”, and “Donald Trump is our Saviour, or something”, amirite? Or is my summary list of TWO items, TOO long?

        1. The 25 pages of text that exist in your head. I am sorry but your hallucinations do not count as evidence.

          1. But I AGREE with you, that Orange Man Bad!!!

            Orange Man bad?!? He BAD, all right! He SOOO BAD, He be GOOD! He be GREAT! He Make America Great Again!

            We KNOW He can Make America Great Again, because, as a bad-ass businessman, He Made Himself and His Family Great Again! He Pussy Grabber in Chief!

            See The Atlantic article by using the below search-string in quotes:
            “The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet”

            He pussy-grab His creditors in 7 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me realty schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!

            All Hail to THE Pussy Grabber in Chief!!!

            Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that all of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can pussy-grab them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of pussy-grabbing us right back!

            Orange Man Bad-Ass Pussy-Grabber all right!

            1. The tapeworms in your shit diet appear to be chewing up what’s left of your brain, Mary.

      2. John, if you’re up to dealing with FACTS, here are some collected Trump quotes that show Him to be the raving egotistic narcissist that He is… HOW do you expect decent leadership from one with SUCH a HUGE ego? How do you expect Him to listen to wise counsel?

        HERE is why “Orange Man” is, indeed, bad! Can you find similar Trump quotes that show Him to be suitably humble, wise, and restrained, as is appropriate for a POTUS?

        Quotes from The Donald in the “Anti Gravity” column in August 2017 “Scientific American” magazine follow:
        “I have great genes and all that stuff, which I’m a believer in”,
        “God helped me by giving me a certain brain”,
        “I have a very, very high aptitude”,
        “Maybe it’s just something you have. You know, you have the winning gene.”
        Google the quotes, they are real…

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/04/17-issues-that-donald-trump-knows-better-than-anyone-else-according-to-donald-trump/
        Trump:
        “I know more about renewables than any human being on Earth.”
        “I understand social media. I understand the power of Twitter. I understand the power of Facebook maybe better than almost anybody, based on my results, right?”
        “Nobody knows more about debt. I’m like the king. I love debt.”
        “I understand money better than anybody.”
        “I think nobody knows the system better than I do.”
        “I know more about contributions than anybody.”
        “Nobody knows more about trade than me.”
        “Nobody knows jobs like I do! ”
        “Nobody in the history of this country has ever known so much about infrastructure as Donald Trump.”
        “There’s nobody bigger or better at the military than I am.”
        “I know more about ISIS [the Islamic State militant group] than the generals do. Believe me.”
        “There is nobody who understands the horror of nuclear more than me.”
        “Because nobody knows the system better than me. I know the H1B. I know the H2B. Nobody knows it better than me.”

        1. You don’t like Trump and think it is okay to overturn the election. We know that. Confirming that fact isn’t really doing much.

        2. Quotes from Mary:

          “I eat shit.”

          1. Quote from Red Rocks White Privilege:

            I like to lie and make shit up. I also like to lick on the yeast-infected pussy of Mary Stack – Mary’s Period – “.” – Tulpa – Satan

            1. At least I don’t eat shit, Mary.

        3. Oh, goody. The grammar-school idiot is here to make an ass of him/herself. Again.
          Grow up; you’re tantrums are tiresome to adults.

          1. No counter-arguments from you as usual… Only childish name-calling. And I am the one who is supposed to grow up!

      3. They are claiming a veto power over the electorate.

        Sure. The FBI has the power to impeach presidents now. LOL

        1. No, they just have the power to make up a fraudulent case that gives the Democrats in Congress and excuse to do so.

          I would say you are trying to be funny here, but no you as in most cases are really this stupid and don’t understand what is going on.

          1. No, they just have the power to make up a fraudulent case that gives the Democrats in Congress and excuse to do so.

            Wait. I thought the Democrats didn’t need any excuse to start impeaching Trump, that they had been pining to do so from Day 1. Now you’re saying they need an excuse?

          2. Chemjeff is a progressive shill
            Nothing more, nothing less

          3. John : “No, they just have the power to make up a fraudulent case that gives the Democrats in Congress and excuse to do so”

            Uh huh, a “fraudulent case” clear even in a doctored transcript; a case clear even before a dozen witnesses followed confirming extortion. And many, many more witnesses are yet to come. There are new revelations almost every day.

            (a) Trading the favor of the United States government for personal gain is wrong

            (b) When that favor is critically needed military supplies for a country under invasion, it’s worse.

            (c) When that personal gain demands collusion of a foreign government against a political foe, it’s even worse.

            (d) When what is demanded (thru extortion) is a Potemkin show “investigation” of discredited garbage like CloudStrike and the Shokin firing, it gets still worse.

            (e) And this criminal enterprise becomes an entire independent foreign policy for private gain alone. United States foreign policy aims are irrelevant – pushed aside when in the way. An ambassador is smeared, slandered and fired when she impedes the scam.

            (f) And Trump’s secret foreign policy for Trump’s private gain alone is peopled with scum and sleaze like Rudy Giuliani, Lev Parnas, Igor Fruman, Victor Shokin and the exiled oligarch Dmytro Firtash – the last one willing to do anything to block criminal extradition to the U.S.

            So that’s the case for impeachment, John. And you know it; you can’t ignore what happened. You’re just willing to excuse it, just like you’d excuse murder if Trump shot a random stranger on Fifth Avenue…..

            Here’s a question : Remember Trump chanting “no collusion” over and over? Starting to wondering what we’d learn about Russia if a few transcripts suddenly appeared on that topic? One thing is certain : Donald John Trump would sell out anything and anybody for the slightest benefit to himself……

  8. Trump actually was elected by the legal process currently in use in the USA.
    How many in the DOJ were elected?
    How many in the House of Representatives ran on impeaching Trump at any cost?
    How many in the House of Representatives have done anything but try to impeach Trump?
    Can we amend the constitution to apply false advertising charges to political ads?
    Who is John Galt?

    1. And, Does Emperor Trump needs to shoot (murder) someone in broad daylight, with the TV cameras streaming, on 5th Avenue, before He can be fairly (deservedly) impeached, w/o His supporters whining about “un-doing an election”? Can He turn into Stalin, w/o being deservedly impeached?

      1. Transmogrification into historical figures, as far as I can tell, is not in itself an impeachable offense. Now, if Trump turned into Stalin solely for the purpose of appealing to the progressive base, and subsequently secured his reelection, then the argument could be credibly made that the metamorphosis was the very essence — indeed, a preeminent example — of Russian interference in our elections.

      2. If you don’t like his policies, convince the public to agree with you and win an election.

        1. The public already agrees with me… The public elected their duly elected reps, via a majority of electoral votes, and they are exercising their Constitutionally-granted powers to move towards impeachment. As your intellectual peer, Tulpa, says, “cry more”.

          Also note what Lord Acton said: Something along these lines: “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” The Trumptatorship has gone frighteningly far enough already (towards WAAAAY too much power in one man’s hands). That is why the Founding Fathers made provisions FAR more wise than what many of you brain-damaged conservatives would make today… They wrote in, the power of impeachment!

  9. The entire FBI and deep state is united in a conspiracy to unseat a duly elected president and there is not a single Trump supporter or principled person in the entire operation willing to blow the whistle and expose the conspiracy. LOL.

    1. No one said the entire organizations to a man are in a conspiracy. The top people that were put into place by Obama certainly were. We have the texts and the emails to prove it. Bob Barr has more than that. This LTC asshole certainly is. And so is the anonymous whistle blower.

      And yes, lots of people in these agencies have called bullshit on this stuff. So, why don’t you take your strawman and burn it somewhere else.

      1. Can’t wait to find out what develops in the alternative universe when this investigation ends and no charges get filed.

        1. The Barr-Durham investigation will not yield any substantive charges unless Trump is reelected in 2020 as it makes no sense to commence a criminal action which the subsequent administration will scuttle in a heartbeat. However, there will be various “reports” and “findings” released in the interim — just enough to sway public opinion in the lead up to the election. If Trump is reelected, expect to see Brennan, Clapper, McCabe, Strzok, Page, among others, indicted – although, realistically, the DOJ may settle for Brennan’s scalp.

          1. We know criminal actions extend into the White House.

            Remember the “unmasking” phase of this scandal? There was also the initiation of the entire FBI investigation by the Obama administration – they took classified information from the supposed counter-intelligence investigation and lowered their classification levels specifically so they could be distributed around the government in order to be leaked to the press after Trump took office – with the explicit intention of justifying impeachment proceedings. The NYT reported this on March 3, 2017. They quote multiple “senior white house officials” as their sources.

            So it was an open secret that they were using the state to destroy political opponents way back in 2016. All of the national press new about it. They were “in the loop”. They had been given the heads up to expect leaks after Trump took office that would justify impeachment.

            Yet they did not report it that way.

            1. Brennan is not the end goal; he will be a crucial stepping stone, however, toward implicating the Obama administration (perhaps, Obama himself) in what will likely be regarded as one of the clearest abuses of executive power in American history.

              However, Obama will *never* be charged, no matter how clear the evidence may be. At best, assuming everything works out and Trump is reelected, Brennan will be prosecuted but will, without question, act as a loyal trooper and take the fall for the entire scheme, cloaking himself in “patriotism” and vague notions of having done it “for the sake of the country.”

              The upshot is that in hanging Brennan, the DOJ will uncover more than enough evidence to irreparably taint Obama’s legacy for decades to come. Twenty, thirty, even forty years from now, people will be talking about Obama with the same dismaying tones as they talk now about Nixon.

              1. Progressive totalitarianism won’t be stopped by anything but violent revolution/suppression.
                Just look at the deep state shills here.

    2. Its all classified what the Lefty bureaucrats have done. FISA court. CIA involvement.

      If you talk about to the public you go to prison for mishandling classified information or worse.

      This was intentional. Classifying everything deters some bureaucrats from whistle blowing. Edward Snowden exposed one of the biggest traitorous acts in US history (domestic spying without warrants) and his life is over.

      Some bureaucrats will just wait for Civil War 2.0 and side with the Patriots.

  10. Even if they unseat a president opposed by many Americans

    Opposed by almost half of them!

  11. https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/30/opinions/25th-amendment-impeachment-opinion-callan/index.html

    How a Trump impeachment could lead to a Pelosi presidency

    Voter’s dilemmas: Vote for Hitler or Satan? Sevo or Tulpa? John or Shitsy? Nardz or JesseAZ? Satan or Beelzebub?

    1. The sources you cite tell it all.

    2. Obviously, and then the impeachments will proceed to the bottom of the line of succession until, ultimately, Betsy Devos is elevated to the presidency. When Jeff Zuker masturbates, is it really necessary for the entire progressive hivemind to suck his balls with such vigor?

  12. Just how bogus this article is can be surmised by the fact that there is NO MENTION that Carter Page was WORKING FOR THE FEDS when he was “collaborating and conspiring with the Russian government”.

  13. President Trump claims he’s that “anybody” who has run up against a deep state conspiracy by long-time government employees who actively oppose his elected administration. It’s a self-serving appeal to conspiracy theories by a particularly clumsy politician who seems to excel at making his own problems. But, yes, he does have a point.

    The author can’t see the forest from the trees. Had Chicago thug Hillary Clinton been elected–as the FBI and intelligence agencies were positive she would be–none of this would have ever come out. Hillary the Chicago thug would have just taken over from Obama the Chicago thug. How many decades would that thugocracy have locked an opposing party out of (at least) the executive branch? Chicago hasn’t had a non-Democratic mayor since 1931.

  14. Funny, I don’t see “many” Americans opposed to Trump over here on the West. I do see “many” who would elect him as President of the Century though.

  15. The first sentence is very disturbing “Even if they unseat a president opposed by many Americans”
    What the hell is that? We have elections for that purpose not the intelligence agencies. If they unseat a president the rule of law and the nation is doomed to chaos and destruction.

Please to post comments